DILIP JANUSING PAWAR,YAVATMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, YAVATMAL

The learned Departmental Representative strongly objected to the submissions of the assessee in restoring the appeals the file of the learned CIT(A) for denovo adjudication and rather submitted that the appeals be dismissed.

We have heard the rival arguments, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. In these cases, we find that there is a delay in filing the appeals before the learned CIT(A) and the assessee has not furnished Affidavit explaining the delay before the learned CIT(A) and resultantly the learned CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the belated appeals filed by the assessee. However, in the interest of justice and also by following the principles of natural justice, we are of the opinion that the assessee deserves one opportunity to establish its case before the learned CIT(A). Consequently, we set aside the impugned orders passed by the learned CIT(A) and restore the both the matter to his file for denovo adjudication on merit and in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to furnish Affidavit explaining the delay in filing the appeals before the learned CIT(A) by adducing proper evidence. Needless to say that the learned CIT(A) shall provide reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee before adjudication of issues on merit and pass order in accordance with law.

In the result, appeals for A.Y. 2015–16 and 2016–17 filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 08/01/2025 K.M. ROY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER V. DURGA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: 08/01/2025